Contributors

I was lazily reading last OSnews when I got stuck into a link to this post by mr.akaimbatman. It is just one of the bazillion articles/blog posts I've read about what the Linux desktop would have to be. But now I'm tired, and so I rant.

After a long Windows-only experience, it's two years I happily use Linux on the desktop 24/7 (with the exception of the Windows XP box I still have to use at work), and it's two years I read this kind of articles. These articles just get me sick. They get me sick because they invariably miss the point. They take a lot of myths about the lack of adoption of Linux on the desktop and they try to solve them with titanic scenarios of complete desktop environment/filesystem refactoring. While there could be many nice individual ideas in their proposed solutions, they completely lack the sense of time and pragmatism.

The reason is simple. All your super ideas about rebuilding the filesystem hierarchy of Linux or merging GNOME and KDE in a single, ultra-cool, ultra-easy desktop environment can be all the best you can think about (most of time they're not, but let's give them a chance). The fact is simply that, given the number of developers and the pace of development of open source software, when all this will happen -if it will happen- we will be already be light years behind other operating systems. Period.

To make Linux a practical desktop solution for the masses we do not need to turn the guts of Linux and X upside down. This is a sin of naivete. We just need a little rational change of mind from the community, and a big effort from the software industry. Let me explain. It will take some post to do it, so prepare to read. Ok? Well, start with

Part I.

I. Linux IS easy and ready for (most of the) desktop. People must just learn its basics. We who use Linux on the desktop don't find it hard. To me Linux is pretty easy when it comes to everyday tasks -even easier than WinXP. So where's the point? When John 'PC User' Doe hears about Linux he usually hears a lot of enthusiastic geeks that assure him that Windows is shit and that Linux is the solution of all John Doe problems. Then John Doe will reply "but I heard Linux is good on servers but not on the desktop" and geeks will point him on the latest-and-greatest Mandriva or SuSE. Until now everything looks almost OK. What will happen then?

What will happen is that John Doe, assured that his new shiny Linux will be easy to use, will try to install and use it on his desktop or -much worse- on his laptop. Then John Doe will fill a hundred of forums asking for silly questions like "how do I install the drivers of the webcam I have on the webcam CD?" or "how do I play my iTunes DRM-protected files?" or "why does not my USB ADSL modem works?" More sooner than later most John Doe's will throw the towel and return to Windows, hastily disgusted from Linux.

Now, the commonplace deduction is: John Doe bad experience has shown that Linux is not ready for the desktop, because "this is hard, that is inconsistent, that else is awkward". Is this right? No. It doesn't mean Linux is perfect -it is absolutely not. But this is not the reason John Doe finds Linux difficult or even unusable.

John Doe did find Linux difficult to use becase he did not learn its basics. He did not learn about it. He never read the instruction manual. When a friend asks me to introduce him into Linux, he almost always says "hey, help me install it, then I will learn it by myself". This will just lead them into troubles. Most PC users have known just DOS and Windows, and just cannot think about something so different. They expect a drive C: or a self-extracting, graphical installer just because they never have known anything else, not because it is intrinsecally easier.

What I answer to my John Doe's that want to install Linux is: read documentation first. Please understand to the last word: f i r s t. This does not mean at all forcing them reading kilotons of man pages. This means telling them the truth: that Linux is different from Windows, and that if they do not readily know the basic differences between the systems before the switch, they will be lost, not less than I would be lost if parachuted in the center of an unknown city. Tell them to look on Google and the Wikipedia, to get familiar with the filesystem hierarchy, the distribution diversity, the meaning of magic words like "shell", "kernel", "window manager", "mount point", "package manager" and so on. They don't need to become gurus. They just need simple, clear concepts like "X is the program that controls the graphics on Linux. It is a separate program, not a part of the OS like in Windows. X itself just controls the basics, but your desktop behaviour and appearance will depend on another program, that's the window manager or desktop manager. There are quite a few, you can try some of them and then pick up the one you like, so your desktop can fit your needs and tastes much better." Tell them even to look at screenshots of KDE and GNOME, so they will be already familiar with their new graphic environment. Tell them the command line exists and that they don't have to fear it. Show them simple examples of how it works, and why it is more flexibile and fast than GUI alternatives for simple tasks like "how much space do I have on my partitions?". Only once they will have some familiarity with Linux concepts, give them a live cd. Tell them they can play with the live cd as much as they want, and they will understand the concepts they're read about and can begin to "feel" Linux under their hands.

Most people will gladly listen and understand such explanations and will actively do it if politely but firmly advised it's good for them to do so. If they say "oh,I will learn it later, just install it" explain them that it's nothing hard, but that they will be LOST if they don't learn, and that it's like to pretend to be able to drive a train just because you can drive a car. If they still insist, well, advice them not to switch, or to prepare for pain.

I know what I say because I had the luck to be prepared to Linux with this approach. When I first considered switching, I just wanted to download all Debian Woody CDs and install them. A friend of mine (the other dude writing on this blog, BTW!) warned me, pointed me to Knoppix and Mandrake and told me that things would have been easier by learning something before. So I downloaded a bunch of tutorials about Linux, I bought a couple of Linux magazines and I spent a couple of weeks by googling and reading stuff. Only after I felt ready to boot a Knoppix, and after some day spent by playing around with Knoppix I finally installed Mandrake 9.1. I remember I was almost disappointed by how easy the transition was, but I realized immediately it was so easy because I was already knowing the basics. And when I see newbies ranting on forums about how bad Linux is, everyone realized they just didn't take the time/will to learn BEFORE installing.

Now to my corollary, point I.a:

I.a: Installing Linux applications is damn easy.

I sadly laughed when I read that he still thinks installing applications on Linux is hard. This was perhaps true years ago, it is pure FUD now. Let me say it clearly: There's nothing easier in XXI-century computing than installing Linux applications with a package manager. I repeat with other words: There's nothing easier than an apt-get or an emerge that can be done on computers today. There are a billion of potentially difficult or awkward things on Linux, but installing applications is not one of these.

In fact, strange as it may seem, I started using Linux and I continue to use it almost mainly for this precise reason. With Linux I have literally thousands of applications that I can install instantly, free of charge and that I can trust because they are Open Source. Do this thought experiment. Imagine a world where Debian or Gentoo are the main operating systems of the planet, and where a new player -Windows- is struggling to conquer the desktop. Now a newbie Windows user tries to install his favourite music player. He is accustomed to XMMS, which he installed simply by (1)firing the command line (2)getting root and (3)typing "apt-get xmms install", and now wants to install Winamp. Imagine him knowing well his Debian-based distro but knowing almost nothing about Windows. I'm sure he will first look for a "Package manager" or "Software install" program on his Start menu and/or Control Panel. He won't find anything useful. He will try the command line, but nothing seems to come from there. So he will look on the Internet what kind of package management Windows has; he will find it is almost none. Amazed and disappointed, he will eventually look for Winamp on the Internet and he will download it. He will find himself with an executable file, something he has never associated with software packages. He will eventually double-click it, and he will find an overwhelmingly annoying graphical install that will ask him silly questions like "where do you want to install me?", and he will stare in confusion by understanding that no /usr/bin exists on Windows. If he's clever he will eventually understand the logic of the process: he will find it also awkward and unnecessarily complex. I expect also him quite upset when he will understand there's no "emerge -Du world" that will help him upgrade all his software, but that he will have to do program-by-program, painfully.

So here's explained the ridicule of this assertion by akaimbatman (the author of the post linked above): Package management is one of those concepts that seems great on the outset, but fails in practice. The issue is that each package has a complex chain of dependencies unique to itself. In order to be certain that a package is compatible with all installations, all combinations of installed packages must be tested! As it is unlikely that anyone would go through so much trouble, the incompatibilities between packages accumulate, and before long the packaging system is rejecting new installs. And that's assuming that a graphical installer exists!

If a graphical installer does not exist, then life becomes even more difficult for the end user. Instead of launching a GUI and selecting the applications he wants, the user must open a terminal and begin typing cryptic commands for which he has no training for.Many proponents of packaging systems downplay these issues by stating that packaging errors don't exist on system XYZ (despite proof to the contrary), and that if the user is running Linux he should be "smart enough" to know how to use the command line. Such statements are just silly. Users want the computer to make their lives easier. Any barrier thrown in their way will only drive them to a different platform. Unfortunately, package managers still drive most Linux desktop distributions.. You're utterly wrong. The packaging system is one of the biggest strenghts of Linux, because it makes installing application easy. Take your Windows fellow and let him see you can start from zero to a fully Internet-aware desktop by typing something like "apt-get firefox gaim xchat thunderbird gftp amule install" instead that downloading and installing a thousand of separate applications from their respective web pages. Oh, your friend does not like typing? Well, let him point-and-click on Guitoo or Mandrake graphic urpmi or something similar. But don't be ridicolous tellimg me that typing "emerge gaim" is difficult, please. The fact the user has no training for typing "emerge foo" IS WRONG, not the package manager. Users need to learn, THEN to use the system. Would you click on an executable installer, if no one ever told you that's the way to install software?

Mr.akaimbatman for some reason also tells me that package managers don't work, that they fail continuously. This is pure FUD. Packaging errors are incredibly rare, despite theorical arguments for the contrary. In 2 years of Linux I just found one real package management error, in an obscure bioinformatic Gentoo ebuild. Mailing the package maintainer solved the issue in 48 hours. That's what open source is for.

We should tell to newbie that want to switch how powerful are the package management systems of Linux. Surely it would be nice to have them somehow unified (but why don't we write a wrapper around all three main package managers? It would be even easier, and transparent, and it wouldn't involve improbable revolutions). But they work. They are damn easy and powerful. Tell our friends Linux is better, because of package management.

I.a.1.: Dealing with non-packaged applications

There is still the problem of applications not included as packages of your current distribution. Finding software is still much easier than on Windows, because you can look for it on Freshmeat or SourceForge or on Savannah, that is, on centralized repositories. The problem is installing tarballs. There are solutions for this problem, that this time belong to the Linux community instead of the end user maybe, but they're don't require any massive rewriting of core components.

First solution, write a compiling packages helper. This requires not much more than being a simple text-based and/or GUI-based thing that gently unpackages the tarball, executes "./configure", "make" and "make install" (or,better,"checkinstall"), and gently prompts any error encountered in a comprehensible way. (Hey, I just found the Python project I was looking for to cut my teeth on!) This still requires advanced feedback from the end user if something goes wrong, or if customization is needed, but if everything is right it would be nothing harder than an apt-get or a double-click installer.

Second solution, distribute static binaries. If dependency hell is your problem, this is perhaps the best solution. I actually love the shared library concept, but I can see that has drawbacks. For big, common libraries like GTK or QT, they can actually be something that the user don't want to install properly, because he/she won't need them except than for one single app, and he/she wants to be sure that single app just works (so we don't want to go into things like "it works with GTK 2.2.3 but not 2.4.1"). For obscure, little dependencies it can be a hell to find them, and it's sad many good apps fall into oblivion just because they depend on a bunch of libnotinstalledonanysystem .so. Building static binaries would solve it: moreover static binaries will run happily compiled with their older libs if newer, not retro-compatible ones are already installed, allowing to avoid contorsionisms like installing KDE 2 libs on a KDE 3 system, for instance. I think it would be foolish to install and distribute static binaries only, but they should be presented as an option by all free software developers (and commercial too).

The second part of akaimbatman critics the filesystem hierarchy of Linux. Here I declare:

I.b: The filesystem structure of Linux is no problem for the end user.

I can't see why the end user should see the directory structure of Linux as a problem (or at least as a major problem). Most of the time they will use only their /home directory, and that's actually one of the things that makes Linux easier and friendlier than Windows. They have no problem to know where is their program, because they will know it is almost always is /usr/bin/program, if they ever need to. Again, it is simply matter of "hey,newbie Linux user,read about the Linux directory structure! You will find it is really rational and simple: all general configuration files are in /etc, all everyday program binaries are in /usr/bin and so on". It is also much friendlier to know your cdrom drive is always /mnt/cdrom than an odd D:, E: or Q:. Again, it is nothing hard if you take the time to understand it before actually using it instead of diving into it expecting that every OS on the planet must be a Windows clone. All advices to change directory structure and all the GoboLinuxes of this world are plain useless, desperate attempts to make of Linux filesystem a fake Windows filesystem. There's nothing bad about both filesystems: they are just different, they need to be understood, and they are out of the user way most of time. We can always try to improve a bit the current scheme, but in general it has nothing bad or awkward. Init scripts structures (SysV or BSD) are surely something that can be improved in the sense of clarity and easiness, for example. But for most part all criticism I've read is basically "This is not Windows", and as such is of no importance.

Ok, enough for now. Of course there are things with Linux that are not good, but they're simply not always the ones that are believed to (and definitely NOT what akaimbatman thinks they are). We're just smashing some involuntary FUD here. New chapters will follow.

1) There's no need to attack someone just because he has "big ideas." Do you really believe this one guy blogging is going to change the direction of all the Gnome/KDE/foo developers? No. If he gets some devs on his side, and they do produce something cool, then God bless them, they're making the world a better place. But you can't claim that his thoughtful analysis of OS design is somehow hurting the Linux community by "slowing it down."

2) Okay, maybe Linux isn't harder than Windows when viewed objectively, but that was never akaiambatman's point. The point is, wouldn't it be nice to have an OS that is actually easy to use from the get-go, that doesn't require a learning curve at all, or a very short one. Wouldn't it be nice if you HADN'T had to spend two weeks Googling Linux man pages before you felt ready to try it out? Especially when you take into account that new users may have limited free time, be of an older generation that's not as adaptable to new concepts, or in developing nations unfamiliar with computing paradigms, the need for such an easy-to-use GUI is easy to see. Ultimately it will benefit casual users as well as power users, because everything will be that much easier to accomplish, without needing to do "research" first.

3) If you've never had a package manager f@ck up your system, then good for you. But just because that's your experience doesn't magically invalidate the experiences of other people. If he says that his attempt to install KDE via apt-get turned into dependency hell (in the comments of the 4th article), I believe him. I've had my system break in various ways on multiple occasions: once when I attempted to install a nasty little KDE skin on Mandrake, another time when attempting to upgrade my Xorg to get the latest graphics drivers on Xandros, and another time when I just tried to update some basic libraries on Novell Linux Desktop (which were even being recommended to me as updates!). In another Mandrake incident, an attempt to install a simple KDE MPlayer frontend that needed some recent libraries led to an endless loop of dependencies that were impossible to solve and ultimately prevented the installation of various other programs. You may notice that I've tried a lot of Linux distros. Why? Sometimes just out of curiosity, but often because I manage to break one and decide to move on to something else in the hopes of better reliability. Maybe you're the kind of guy who's found one distro and set of apps that works for him and doesn't mess with it. Good for you. But while your experiences have been trouble-free, your repeating over and over that "Linux applications are the easiest thing to install ever" doesn't make that true for all the people who have had Linux break thanks to poor package management.

Hey :) very nice story that i've ejoyed reading and even would have agreed, but unfortunately my personal experience doesn't let me do so.. though i am a developer it took me about a month to become familar with sufficient system usage.. it doesn't mean that i regret - on contrary, now i spend most of the time running my debian, and even not always opening X.. however, this month of education was rather painful.. if i were a home user with basic needs i would prefer a system with naive structure and self-educating interface

Ok, some answer here:There's no need to attack someone just because he has "big ideas.

Having big ideas in itself is a very good thing. Having ONLY big sci-fi ideas without a pragmatic point of view is bad. This causes what I call the GNOME syndrome: GNOME is a DE that is built on hundreds of futuristic ideas on desktop usability, but that still can't manage a decent menu editor. That's the problem. Let's have something good before trying to reverse it upside-down.

wouldn't it be nice to have an OS that is actually easy to use from the get-go, that doesn't require a learning curve at all, or a very short one. Wouldn't it be nice if you HADN'T had to spend two weeks Googling Linux man pages before you felt ready to try it out?

There is NO thing like an OS that's easy to use from the get-go. People fire Windows and try to use it because there's nothing else. They rapidly learn what the hell C: is, what to do when unplugging a USB pen or so on, just because they're forced to do so. I think an hypothetical KDE/Linux user of a Mandrake that never saw Windows would learn it in the same fast way of other Windows users.The fact is that people are presented with Windows, and later try to use Linux. At this time they're already super-accustomed to Windows and they want Linux to be the same. That's the wrong assumption.

Maybe you're the kind of guy who's found one distro and set of apps that works for him and doesn't mess with it. Good for you. But while your experiences have been trouble-free, your repeating over and over that "Linux applications are the easiest thing to install ever" doesn't make that true for all the people who have had Linux break thanks to poor package management.

I actually used Mandrake,Debian,Slackware,Gentoo and even tried FreeBSD and GNU/Hurd on some system. I still use both Slackware and Gentoo on two machines. I never met the problems you're talking me about dependency hell, but I trust you and akaimbatman if you tell me there are. Ok. I must also confess today I have to emerge KDE 3.4, and I'm a bit scared. But it wouldn't be less scary if I should install it with a standalone installer.

If dependency hells arise with package management, it's fault of the package maintainer, not of the package management system. Contact him/her. There's always room for improvement, but package management is one of the best ways ever invented to install software I've ever seen.

I can't see how the solution proposed by akaimbatman can help dependency hell (if it happens), unless we begin to distribute static binaries, and we could do the same with package managers.

Especially when you take into account that new users may have limited free time, be of an older generation that's not as adaptable to new concepts, or in developing nations unfamiliar with computing paradigms, the need for such an easy-to-use GUI is easy to see.

An easy to use GUI is a must, but this DOES NOT mean people dont' have to learn what's behind it.

Shouldn't the system try to fit itself to what user anticipates instead of forcing the user to pass through numerous man pages?

No. No. No. No. No.People must do various exams to drive a car here in Italy, for example. Why do we feel that people need education to drive cars but not to use computers? Be warned, I'm not born as the computer geek guy. Before switching to Linux,I was quite able to use Windows for basic needs but I was absolutely not a computer guru. Nor I am now. I just developed an enthusiasm in these two years.One thing that Linux taught me is that the world does not needs clueless users with an OS holding their hands. These people will be NEVER proficient with computers, no matter if they use Linux/Windows/MacOS X. The world needs people able to understand at least basically their computers. Computers are complex because computer do anything. You can have basic expectation from a digital camera, for example, because you expect you can push a button and make a photo for example. Computers do any thing, so you can't expect nothing. You have to learn. Period. Linux helped me to learn about computers, and this helps me tremendously even here at work with Windows XP.

People must do various exams to drive a car here in Italy, for example. Why do we feel that people need education to drive cars but not to use computers?Cause people that don't know to drive a car simply take a bus and still get to their destination... possibly it takes them more time, and they don't use the shortest route, however they don't need any significant skills.. and this kind of service must be delivered.. and those who have time and desire can pass car tests and be very proud of themselves..

people that don't know to drive a car simply take a bus and still get to their destination

What a senseless (extension of my) analogy. Buses have a driver. This means in your analogy people should have someone paid that will be using/fixing the computer for them. A similar kind of business exists: it is called paid technical assistence.

The analogy with cars was to say that someone driving a car must know what a wheel or a friction or a brake does. The same must be for computers, that are much more flexible and complex than cars. I feel people should get some education about it at schools, some serious education that must not cover point-and-click use of word processors, but feeling and knowledge of computer insights. Teaching kids to install and use Linux at school would be by itself good, not so much because I'm pushing Linux, but because (most distributions of) Linux push the user to learn about their machines. The nice touch of Linux is that by using the software, you learn to use the hardware.

But that would not be necessary, I don't advocate a world in which everyone is painfully sweating trying to install Gentoo from stage one. I want a world where simply people have in their mind the frame of simple concepts like "mounting a cd-rom means telling the computer the cd-rom is accessible and putting it somewhere in the directory tree" or "partitions are a way to divide your hard disk space in virtually separated sections", nothing more complicated.

Ich Bindawalross (London) - GNAA (NYSE: GNAA) President timecop released a statement today regarding the immediate Internet release of MacOS X for the x86 architecture, available on many BitTorrent networks. After making the statement, timecop yielded the stage to a second speaker at the press conference, Apple Computer co-Founder and CEO, Steve "Rim" Jobs, now fully recovered from his recent gender reassignment surgery to field questions from attending press members.

"We here at Apple Computerth [sic] have decided on a slightly different path for the upcoming version of the MacOS X," Jobs states before bursting out into high pitched giggles. "We have replaced our overpriced and bloated software with an efficient and easy-to-use interface. I would like to take this opportunity to announce a merger larger than a Zimbabwe nigger cock: GNAA and Apple Computer."

Returning to the podium, timecop began speaking again, while Steve Jobs submitted to orally pleasuring his ten inch nigger cock. "Dedicated faggots have been loyally purchasing the homosexual software and hardware abomination that is Macintosh computers. Apple has been striving to provide software customers with the most flambouyantly homosexual combination available. However, in recent days, this hasn't been enough.

"There has been increasing pressure from the disgustingly obese Lunix nerds and the socially well-adjusted and popular Windows users to convert, as well as pressure from OS X emulators to provide consumers with increasingly gay products. Apple Computer has decided to merge with GNAA in order to broaden the appeal and better serve the interests of all those who buy Macintosh products. Furthermore, we will adopt Apple's "Step 2 ???? PROFIT!" marketing model. This will also stop Apple from going out of business, which they probably would have otherwise."

At this point, timecop paused and deposited a quart of Gaynigger seed into Steve Jobs' mouth.

"GNAApple is committed to our new OS X86. Rather than give the user the difficulty of finding pornography themselves, we provide them with the classic hello.jpg, redundantly archived and brand labeled throughout the 950 MB DVD image, as well as a bundled copy of GPA (Gay Porn Avalanche). Now, greater efficiency in masturbatory pursuits can be provided to all."

"As Slashdot users, many of you might have been exposed to the pirated release, and information pertaining to it. We would like to thank Rob "CmdrCocko" Malda for running the first article, leading to the release of information about our upcoming merger. We would also like to extend our gratitude to thepiratebay.org and XiSO for helping us spread the release over the 'underground scene.' We thank you, the IRC channels who put it on their hacked .edu xdcc bots and fserves who hosted it on your dialup connections.

Steve Jobs, recovering from the large dosage of AIDS from the variety of syphilitic, festering sores of GNAA members, rose to his feet at this point during the press conference. "Our previous versions of OS X were released prematurely, and as a result the operating system was unstable and fragile. Our team of software engineers have also decided to abandon the weak and inefficient UNIX backside in favor of a more efficient and robust alternative: WinNT. The pirated version of our new operating system has had record acclaim from users of the Jewish-based internet news organization known as "Slashdot".

"Those doubting the superiority of our new release need only read user testimonials."

"The Torrent going around as: Mac OS X Tiger X86 READNFO-XISO It's a complete fake. When the image is booted it shows a picture of a guy showing off his Bu** H**e." - Anon Coward

"if you unrar, burn, and boot like the .nfo file says, it just boots it to a very lovely goatse image. no joke, wasted two hours of my life and made a coaster out of some DVD+R media. HILARIOUS!" - BobVila

"Best. Goatse.cx. Trap. Ever." - saddino

"Aw crap, I thought you guys who said it was fake were just being fags. Opened up the first rar in my hex editor n after scrolling ,I too saw the "GNAAGNAAGNAA" *cries* I want Mac OS for my Pee-Ceeeeeeee." - Mark

"im crying GNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" - hootie

"GNAA > me. Fristage Postage is theirs" - Pat Gunn

About Apple:

Apple Computer is the creator of the Macintosh, popularly known as the "gay computer". 87% of GNAA members are Mac users. Founded in 1974 by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, Apple was nearly out of business in the mid 90's, when Jobs was rehired. He then started the now infamous iGay marketing scheme which involved both the Step 2 ???? Profit model, and a 100% effort towards marketing towards homosexuals.

About GNAA:GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY?Are you a NIGGER?Are you a GAY NIGGER?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

* First, you have to obtain a copy of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent. * Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website. * Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on irc.gnaa.us, and apply for membership.

Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is NiggerNET, and you can connect to irc.gnaa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

about time for a rant of such calibre! i switched from OSX, this apparent beacon of user-friendliness and have never looked back since whacking Ubuntu on my PB.

friends are doing it on their macs also after being sick to death with stuff like the finder, expensive upgrades and also (interestingly) wanting to have a mobile systemsynced with their home desktop system.

Thank you! Finally someone that *actually* knows what it is writing about.

That the 'linux os' doesn't have to be rewritten to have all these super-duper-things because with a few fixes we can do it!

Linux doesn't have to copy damn windows!

That package managers are GREAT! The other day I was ssh'ing to my computer from my school and remembered about bb, the aalib demo, and wanted to show it to my friend. Did I have to go and compile anything? Did I have to google for a zip (I can't use installer, remember, cli!), to unzip and run and etc?? No!! I just typed sudo rug install bb and the program was available 30 secs later. Try doing that on windows!! Oh whats that? You cant? You need to get vnc on a super-slow connection with 16 colors so you can slowly press next next next so you can install something? Ooo I guess windows isn't that great after all.

While I slightly agree with people who'd like to see Linux get easier, I strongly aggree with your position that the worst thing Linux could start doing is changing the parts that already work nicely and easily (as the guy you responded to was mostly suggesting).

The one part akaimbatman's article mentioned that would be nice is for non-root users to be able to more easily install applications. However, as akaimbatman already mentioned, there are multiple solutions that address this for Linux today.

I read about halfway into these comments, and you mentioned the simple KDE 3.4 upgrade you're going to run. Herein, I think lies the crux of AKAImBatmans argument. You say you're nervous... well, you should be. With Linux as it stands today, with all the great package managers out there, you can still FSCK up your system and lose precious hours and days of time putting it right.

Now lets step back, and take AKAImBatmans idea. /opt/Kde34.isoz (gzipped loopback filesystem) Containing all of KDE3, libs, everything. simple switch in your Xconfig to point to /opt/kde34 and bam, your desktop either works, or doesn't, because X knows enough to get it's desktop settings from metadata in the app iso.

Dozens of other applications just like it. If something breaks, simply reset. No system libraries changed. No system configuration files are able to be broken. The previous version can be might read-only with a simple chmod, and you always have the ability to roll back, without having to depend on rollback functionality which doesn't exist in ANY of the current package managers (AFAIK).

I don't know. I've been using Unix for better than 11 years now, and I'm used to it. But I'm ready for a change. Linux made swapping kernels easy with separate modules directories... it's time our applications adjust as well. Dumping everything into /usr/local/lib and /usr/lib may make things work easier, but certainly not better

I don't get how having every command just as "command" is more difficult than "C:\Program Files\appvendor\app\app.exe".

Remember that when you want a symlink (sorry, a "link") right to your desktop. 99% of the times I just write the plain name of the app in the "command" field. The other 99% of the times, I just drag the icon from the menu to the desktop or to the taskbar. Tough, that. And it's all because all binaries are usually in a known location. Without "a huge mess of files and libraries" (as I think akaImBatman or someone else said) unless you've really broken the system.

kaminski: in fact i'm not nervous for the install. The Gentoo Portage is just going to manage that almost as you pointed out, since it will install KDE 3.4 side-to-side with KDE 3.3. Later I will uninstall KDE 3.3, when I'm sure KDE 3.4 is not broken.

The KDE 3.4 install is a complex issue because the old big, all-inclusive KDE package has been splitted in various different sub-packages with this upgrade. That's good, because it all goes for flexibility, but it can be pretty confusing indeed at the first time (and that's why I'm a bit worried), and KDE packagers should have maintained a "complete" ebuild too perhaps, to ease things.

But that's Gentoo. And Gentoo is a great distro, but not for the Linux newbie, surely. When I was a newbie using Mandrake I had no problem in upgrading things. Nor I really have now, I just want to be sure of what I'm doing by reading some forum, something responsible users should do anyway..

ùLuckily the Gentoo community provides a lot of good quality documentation, both in the form of official docs than in the form of wikis and forum. Good and centralized documentation and forum support is something that must be improved surely, and Gentoo is a shiny example of what the community support of a distro should be.

Anyway, If I run in bad luck with the upgrade, I promise to report it here and to give you a beer!

People must do various exams to drive a car here in Italy, for example. Why do we feel that people need education to drive cars but not to use computers?

Uh, because a car is a large metal object weighing hundreds of pounds moving at high speed, and if you lost control you're liable to kill yourself, someone or several someones, and damage valuable property? Maybe it's just me but it seems like the stakes are just a tad bit higher when driving a car than when using a computer, and those stakes justify just a bit more government intrusion.

But even if we ignore the obvious, your analogy falls flat on its face. I can teach someone the concepts involved in driving a car in 30 seconds, 60 if it has a standard transmission. Put this lever in D to go forward and in R to back up, P when you park the car. Press this pedal to go; the harder you press it, the faster you go. Press this pedal to stop; the harder you press it, the quicker you stop. Turn this wheel in the direction you want to go. Add in a few nuances like turn signals and headlights and that's it. Most of the time spent learning to drive a car is actually spent learning the physical skills needed to control it. There is some study time in learning the rules of the road, what the signs mean, etc. But there's nothing comparable to reading this mythical "Linux manual" you mention. You don't have to be an ASE certified auto mechanic to drive to the grocery store and back.

John Doe did find Linux difficult to use becase he did not learn its basics. He did not learn about it. He never read the instruction manual.

And that's the whole point. The fact that you can say that without blinking an eye means that everything that is being discussed just zoomed right over your head.

I'm a geek. I love computers. I don't mind spending hours reading computer manuals and digging through Google searches for the article that has the solution to whatever problem I'm trying to solve. Hell, that's what I do for fun. But I'm not most people. Most people would rather have their toe nails yanked out than wade through boring technical documents. And suppose that the user DID want to spend the time reading the manual? What should he concentrate on? Which manual is it that's going to teach him "how do I install the drivers of the webcam I have on the webcam CD?" or "how do I play my iTunes DRM-protected files?" or "why does not my USB ADSL modem works?" If it answers all of those questions, just how many volumes are in the thing anyway, and where can I get my hands on one? It'd be a handy reference to have on my bookshelf.

The general public doesn't want to read manuals. Most people don't even read the manual to learn how to set the time on their VCR. They sure as hell aren't going to read a manual to learn how to use a new operating system.

Your rant isn't anything new. It's simple a rehash of "Fuck 'em if they're too stupid to learn how to use Linux."

There are two primary viewpoints that underlie all of this discussion. Some people want Linux to succeed as a desktop system - they want to beat MS at the heart of their own game. Other people could care less whether or not Linux makes a dent in Windows desktop sales, so long as it works for them.

If you're part of the latter group, then your position is fine. Linux works just peachy keen for those who want to invest the time and effort to learn how to use it. That includes me. It includes you. It probably includes most of the readers of this blog. But it excludes most of the people you meet walking down the street. But if you're in the latter group, you don't care about them anyway.

If you're part of the former group, however, that wants Linux to succeed on the desktop, then "RTFM" isn't even a wrong answer, it's not an answer period. It's not an option; not even listed on the test. If you want Linux to succeed on the desktop, then you need to make it easy enough to use that you don't have to read the fucking manual. You need to make it easy and intuitive and child proof. That's what those big ideas you're ranting about are concerned with. And you haven't added anything at all to the discussion.

Your rant isn't a response to AKAImBatman's blog. It's not even part of the same conversation. It's part of a different conversation that AKA isn't even concerned with. Do you have anything to add to that conversation?

The reason people are supposed to be nervous when updating KDE is that they're trying to replace their whole graphical shell! Do you think it'd be any easier to take explorer.exe from Windows 2000 and install it on Windows 98? akaimbatman would have been better off if he just got a more recent distro and reinstalled.

@Anonymous (the last comment):You missed the point, go and read the article a few more times. Mr. dev/urandom clearly said that there is no perfect OS that "just works", you still have to RTFM before using a computer be it Windows or Linux or OSX, it's just that people are forced to learn Windows first and later can't imagine another OS to be that different.

You missed the point, go and read the article a few more times. Mr. dev/urandom clearly said that there is no perfect OS that "just works", you still have to RTFM before using a computer be it Windows or Linux or OSX, it's just that people are forced to learn Windows first and later can't imagine another OS to be that different.

How many (non-geek) people do you know that read a manual to learn to use Windows? How many people do you know tha switched from Windows to OSX (or OS9 or OS8...) and then switched back to Windows because the Apple OS was too hard to use? Why is the web full of blogs about people who switched to Apple and rave about how easy it is to use and it isn't full of people who switched to Linux and rave about how easy it is to use? If you think that Linux success on the desktop is a good thing (and I'm not convinced that it is...), then Linux needs to be more like Apple in terms of ease of use than like Windows.

anonymous: OK for the car analogy, it wasn't good in fact. But I hope the sense is clear. Cars are complex machines that do one thing (moving). Computers are overwhelmingly complex machines that do a bazillion things (except moving,perhaps!). It seems clear to me that if you need education for the former, you will need even more for the latter.

And that's the whole point. The fact that you can say that without blinking an eye means that everything that is being discussed just zoomed right over your head.

It didn't zoom right over my head. It is simply a wrong point of view IMHO. Your point of view is "There is a thing like a ready-to-go computer, and we must revolutionize this and that to go there". My point of view is "There is NO thing like a ready to go computer. Or,if there is, it is really far away. We cannot waste time. Right now Linux is good enough to gain position in the desktop, among the users that want to learn this, and if we polish just a few details (I'll cover them in new posts I hope)."

I don't think average users are too stupid to use Linux. In fact I think quite the opposite: almost everyone can use Linux, if educated to. I repeat: RTFM for me doesn't mean reading man pages or technical howtos on how to recompile the kernel. It means learning things like "your /home directory is where all your documents go", "you can install fooprogram by opening a shell, becoming root and typing 'apt-get fooprogram install': this will download fooprogram from the Internet and install it automatically", "your cd-rom drivers for your webcam won't ever work on linux, because they're for windows, and different OS need different drivers", "USB ADSL modems are not linux-friendly. subsitute it with an ethernet one." - simple,child-proof concepts.

then Linux needs to be more like Apple in terms of ease of use than like Windows.

Sure. I don't think there's no room for improvement. There's a LOT of room for improvement. But that's not this the main thing that is keeping users away from Linux, IMHO. It is still preventing Linux to rapidly blow away other systems perhaps, that's true. But don't tell me Linux is not usable on the desktop by anyone that wants to google a bit before using it: it is just false.

But don't tell me Linux is not usable on the desktop by anyone that wants to google a bit before using it: it is just false.

I don't argue that. I've been using Linux since '92 or '93. I've been using it as my primary home desktop since sometime in the late '90s. But the whole point is that your group of "...anyone that wants to google a bit before using it..." leaves out a whole hell of a lot of people. The simple fact is that people switch to Apple every day and they don't have to climb a steep learning curve to do it. Sure, they may have to put some effort into it to learn all of the nuances of the OS, but they can fire up an Apple and feel comfortable. They fire up a Linux distro and they're completely lost.

anonymous: completely lost? hmm, the other great problem of Linux is that users must almost always install it before using it. Give users a preinstalled, preconfigured, ready-to-go Linux KDE desktop with a software installer GUI like Synaptic, and I think they will learn to use it quite easily for most basic tasks. They wouldn't be really proficient users, anyway, and they would be lost when problems arise, like when they take some new odd piece of hardware, for example. As almost all users are lost on Windows when problems arise, anyway.

I will eventually have to set up a Linux desktop for my girlfriend,anyway. When she will tell me "ok,I need it" (she needs to find a home before taking the PC), let's see if the experiment works.

Im happy with your responses. I am also a happy Gentoo'er with a desktop/workstation that is doing wonderful. I agree that there are ups and down to GNU/Linux but my desktop experience has been much more fluid and enjoyable with Linux than it has been with my past use of Windows (98 and xp).

"you can install fooprogram by opening a shell, becoming root and typing 'apt-get fooprogram install': this will download fooprogram from the Internet and install it automatically"

This is just standard Linux elitism.

Let me ask you a few questions:

1) Why should a user have to know what a "shell" is?

2) Why should a user have to know what "root" is?

3) Why should a user have to know the command is "apt-get?"

In OS X and Windows, you can install software without knowing any of those things. (Slight disclaimer: if you're using Windows as a normal user, you might have to know what an Administrator account is. But the word "administrator" makes sense in context, where "root" is part of a tree.)

Anyway, all of the people who rally on about how great Linux packaging systems are forget one major point:

If Linux ever *does* get popular on the desktop, and developers want to write software for Linux, package managers don't support them at all. Package managers *only* work if you install *only* open-source software; if you install commercial software, you've just added a lot of shared library to your system that your package manager doesn't know about and you're likely as not to have hosed it up.

Maybe you like package managers better than OS X's installing via disk image; fine. You're welcome to that opinion. But package managers, at least current ones, are crippled by not being able to cope with commercial software. Apple's install mechanism can; Windows' install mechanism can.

Think about that. Linux needs commercial software to be popular on the desktop.

Because knowing that makes installing software even easier and more consistent than the Windows way. And allows to do much more things. And they are easy things. You say it's elitism. I say it's a false elitism. Years of Windows poisoning made us think that the simple concept of a command line immediately would rise thoughts like "OMG!THIS IS A THING FOR 1337 H4><0R2!". But not so much time ago we lived in a world in which everyday people used DOS command line.

Try to understand me: I don't want to get back to people using the shell 24/7. This is senseless. I want people to know they have another instrument that sometimes is good, sometimes is not. Anyway do you want a GUI to install software?Ok. Do you want to hide the word "root"? Hide it in the software, let GUIs ask for "administration password" instead of "root password". That's fine with me. But you still have to explain me why typing apt-get is an HARD, ODD concept.

Remember: I was no computer geek when I started using Linux. But I learned it, and it was easy.

But package managers, at least current ones, are crippled by not being able to cope with commercial software.

Bzzt!Wrong.Gentoo's Portage for example can already install Cedega or Crossover Office.You can already have packages enclosed in an install cd, they're no way different from installers in this way. But package managers also allow for new, more flexible kind of software commerce. For example you could pay for subscriptions to commercial software repositories. Full support to this mechanism would just require very minor changes to package management systems IMHO (support for some kind of secure login I think).

Because knowing that makes installing software even easier and more consistent than the Windows way. And allows to do much more things. And they are easy things. You say it's elitism. I say it's a false elitism. Years of Windows poisoning made us think that the simple concept of a command line immediately would rise thoughts like "OMG!THIS IS A THING FOR 1337 H4><0R2!". But not so much time ago we lived in a world in which everyday people used DOS command line.

That last line is simply false. Everyday people didn't use the DOS command line. Everyday people couldn't use a computer other than a few simple, painfully-learned tasks. If you could use a command line, you were God in the office and spent most of your time helping other people on their computer rather than getting your own work done. I don't know how old you are but I'm 39. I lived through those times. And I'm speaking from direct, personal experience.

But you still have to explain me why typing apt-get is an HARD, ODD concept.

I can't explain it to you. The very fact that you ask the question shows how deeply ingrained your elitism is. I don't mean that as an insult or a slam. It's just a fact. Computer concepts simply aren't that difficult to you and you are incapable of understanding why they are to anyone else.

You have a set of geek filters on and you don't seem to be able to take them off to see how the rest of the world lives. Learning a few "simple" concepts to use Linux is a major undertaking for the average person, particular those over the age of 25 who didn't grow up with computers. You blithely talk about Portage and apt and package managers but you might as well be speaking greek to most people. They don't even have the background concepts that you need to start to understand what you're talking about. I'd bet that you spend a great deal of time with either young people who grew up with computers, geeks and/or near geeks. You don't seem to have any idea how utterly foreign all of these concepts are to most people.

The bottom line is that most people see a computer as an appliance and there is no way in hell they're going to spend time reading manuals or Googling to learn to use them. Maybe you're right that their expectations are out of whack. Maybe they SHOULD spend the time to learn before they sit down. But the market isn't driven by what people should do or the expectations they should have. The market doesn't cater to you. Either you cater to the market or you get left behind. When it comes to the desktop market, Linux is being left behind (or, more accurately, was never there in the first place.) The only way to change that is to try to meet the expectations the users do, actually have. Telling them to RTFM isn't going to do it.

That last line is simply false. Everyday people didn't use the DOS command line.

I don't know in what parallel universe did you live once, but in my universe ordinary people spent their day with DOS. I'm 24,by the way. My mum that still has serious problems understanding simple things on Windows (and with this I answer to your second criticism: I'm really accustomed to see and assist people that are deeply clueless about computers, being them my mum or my non-geek friends -I have many, BTW, and I'm no real computer geek too) once used DOS on our old 8086 and then 286 and 386 PCs. She wasn't of course a DOS hacker, but she eventually became familiar with it, and she was accustomed to type "print file.txt" or "cd c:\patrizia".

Not all my friends lived with DOS. There's a friend of mine that is everything but computer geek. He just used Windows to play games and write things with Word. Now he just bought a laptop and he's learning to use it. One day he asked me about Linux in my home. I took him and I calmly and simply explained him the main concepts, showing them on my PC. He grasped them quite easily and he was *amazed* by the package manager thing, that he understood almost immediately. He's now seriously considering to switch to Linux. I told him to document himself a bit, and I'm sure it won't be that painful for him.

You still have to explain me why me, a once average user, was able to switch to Linux. Why me, that mainly uses computers as a tool to get work done, and only later with Linux began to use them as a hobby too, bothered to learn. I feel I simply had the luck to understand it was the right thing to do. I can't see why other people cannot understand it too, if told so.

Bah. You basically called mr.akaimbatman a Troll. I call you a troll. Have you looked at the avg state of Windows users out there? Half of them don't even know what a file is, or how to make a shortcut. You can go on using your "easy" Linux, but 75% of the population does not even know the manual exists, much less that Linux exists.

Have you looked at the avg state of Windows users out there? Half of them don't even know what a file is, or how to make a shortcut.

Odd they manage to open and write and send files everyday and they fill their desktop of shortcuts. Anyway if Linux conquers not the other half, but just a 15-20% of desktop users (and I'm almost sure more than 20% of desktop users could manage Linux if educated to), it would be a major win, isn't it?

but 75% of the population does not even know the manual exists, much less that Linux exists.

Uh, that's exactly what we should fight for. Tell people (1)Linux exists (2)Tutorials exists (and if not,we have to write them) (3)After reading a tutorial, you'll realize Linux is not so hard and your user experience will improve.

You still have to explain me why me, a once average user, was able to switch to Linux. Why me, that mainly uses computers as a tool to get work done, and only later with Linux began to use them as a hobby too, bothered to learn. I feel I simply had the luck to understand it was the right thing to do. I can't see why other people cannot understand it too, if told so.

I know you can't see it. That's exactly the problem. You're bright (your writing ability shows that) and had computers introduced to you fairly early in life and damn it, this crap isn't so hard if people would just take a few moments to learn about the tools they're trying to use. It's an utterly reasonable position, and one I can certainly sympathize with. Unfortunately, it's completely disconnected with reality. Most people aren't so bright and so clueful and, like your Mom and my wife, they struggle with the simple things on Windows.

How hard is it to write a literate sentence? You take a noun and a verb, add a few adjectives and adverbs and glue them together with all of the other parts of speech. You manage it quite fine. So do I. It's not that hard. Now take a look at the emails you receive. THOSE are the people you're telling to go read a manual and learn to use Linux. If that doesn't help you understand, then I don't know what will.

anonymous: OK, now I realize what you mean. You just gave me the idea for the next post, so wait your answer there.

Oh,thank you for pleasing my ego about my "brightness" and "writing ability" :D, I'm expecially pleased about the latter, since I'm not a native English speaker. Too bad my pronounce is so awful instead...

I would disagree with most of the article. I'm a Linux user, but even I would say that it is definitely not ready for the average user to just pick up and use. The thought of explaining to my parents what mount points, desktop environments, kernels, modules, etc. are is just crazy. They don't care - they just want it to work. The average user should never ever have to use the command line.

You were tired and should have went to bed instead of doing this rant.

All your points are *invalid*.

You never had to deal with *usability* and it shows.

Package managers for Linux desktop are a cruel joke. But I don't blame the Linux kernel, I blame corporations that publish desktop Linux distros even though they have no idea what a desktop should be like.

In Linux distros, there are too many steps for everything. Installing MP3 support, NTFS (hint: most users installing Linux are Windows users), etc...

You are so off track it's incredible. It's the year 2005, not the 70ies. That console (terminal) should *never* be used. I don't use it to install BeOS, eComStation (OS/2), MacOS X, Windows XP and all the other desktop OSes. Why the hell should I submit myself to cryptic command switches... Because it's Linux?

If you want to catter to the desktop users, you have to make it work like a desktop. I find it amazing how after so many years people in the Linux world still don't get it.

And that's the problem. Computers are not (single-function) appliances. In order for them to function like one, someone has to do the hard work of taking out all the bits that don't involve the user. If you automate this, you make the end users life simpler, but they lose flexiability in the process.

This is why Macs work so well as single-user (at a given time, regardless of OS capability) desktops, because that's what they're made to do, and they do it well. Linux works extraordinarly well for me as a multi-user system in a networked multi-platform environment with a paid sys-admin (me), because that's what it's been made to do. However, part of my job involves taking the icky bits of system and presenting them to the users in appliance form. The end-users don't care how LDAP and Kerberos and Samba works, they just want the ability to log in at any workstation with the same username and password. The Windows 2Kx family does this with Active Directory because they sacrificed (for better or worse) some immediate flexability for the ability for part time system-administrators to setup Active Directory domains relativily easily. The downside is that making Win2Kx server take on a role that you don't have a wizard for is a quite a bit harder than in Linux, and involves breaking from the normal admin interface.

Ronald:I blame corporations that publish desktop Linux distros even though they have no idea what a desktop should be like.

Ximian, SuSE, and Lycoris seem to have a pretty good idea, along with Xandros and Linspire.

Installing MP3 support...

That almost made me laugh out loud. A simple apt-get install (xmms|rhythmbox|amarok|mplayer|mpg123) ( | being the perl "or" equivalent, if you didn't know) and I had mp3 support. My lame VIA onboard soundcard was detected and configured painlessly, although I did have to mangle some module loading order to make my Audigy2 the primary sound card in the machine.

I'm not accusing Linux of being perfect for anything yet. I'm saying that it's coming close.

On one hand, we have the optimistic view that everyone can grasp the relatively simple concepts (paradigms) upon which computers are built so that they can have a fundamental basis to understand the more complex operations.

On the other hand, we have the realist (and, I would argue, the defeatist) view that people just want the thing to work and not have to understand anything about the underlying technology.

Both viewpoints are valid and correct.

I, myself would have to opt for the former (optimistic) viewpoint, though. The problem for me with the realist view is that it "gives up" on people. It is kind of like: most people don't want to learn how to do math, and we have calculators, so we should just stop teaching math. This leads to people who can't solve simple problems that come up in life like how to balance a checkbook or figure out how to create a budget for getting out of debt. Or how about this one: most people don't like to learn how to spell words or use a dictionary, and we have word processors which can correct spelling and grammar, so we should just stop teaching spelling, vocabulary, and grammar. This leads to people who can't read, write, or routinely use words incorrectly as in "cause and affect", "irregardless", and "she gots".

Additonally, computers can be dangerous. Without an understanding of the basic workings, you can not protect yourself from the dangers inherent in their usage. A majority of viruses, trojans, spam, and spyware are propagated because people just don't know when they are at risk. If people understood the basics of how the Internet works, how email works, how executables and scripts work, then a majority of viruses would be defeated. They would not need to run resource-hogging virus protection, spyware detection, and anti-spam programs. They would not need to have "the elitist" users rebuild their computers because they would not screw them up in the first place.

It seems to me that dev/urandom is just saying that Linux is no harder to learn than Windows or MacOS, given that the user wants to learn (any OS). What no one is really addressing is the fact that the majority of users don't really know Windows or MacOS - that is why Windows computers get so f*cked up all the time. An incredible amount of programming effort goes into hiding the underlying technologies from the user. This is counter-productive in my estimation. It makes the system more bloated, slower, and more prone to security flaws (more code=more exposure).

Why the hell should I submit myself to cryptic command switches... Because it's Linux?

Because it's a powerful instrument. It actually makes life EASIER in SOME PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES. That's what you don't want to understand, because we have all been forced to think that a desktop means 100% GUI. Wrong. A desktop means an easy to use environment for the end user, WHATEVER IT IS. For example it's sad we have to rely on the command line to active mouse wheel support. But it's perfectly fine we can rely on it to type a simple "emerge packagefoo" to install packagefoo, or to type "df" if we want to know immediately how much space we have on our partitions. It's about choosing the best tools for our work.

A modern desktop does mean 100% gui, though. To the end-user, a command line is scary. Do you honestly think that your 70-year-old grandma will go out of her way to to ./configure && make && make install and then sit through hundreds of lines of output about things she doesn't understand? There should always be a GUI equivelant--built into the OS, and not as a third-party program, that does at least partially what the CLI does. Until the Linux community as a whole realizes that hours of playing in the console and editing .confs by hand makes it both scary for the end user and more complicated, Linux will not ever be ready for mass-market use. Windows is so popular because it's so much easier. A completely computer illiterate person will be more inclined to start with windows because there's a much less steep learning curve than there is for linux. The point of a desktop OS is not an incredible amount of power--because if it was, we'd have a completely different Windows XP--it's something that's really fucking easy to use.

I agree that linux is ready for Prime Time. I first installed Caldera in something like 1997. What a pain in the ass that was. But I was an HP-UX/Solaris/Irix admin back then, so I knew what pain was. But flash forward to today ... I'm no longer amazed when X boots right out of the shoot. Even with nVidia cards. I've grown to expect it.

There are countless other ways that linux is as user friendly as you need it. Every time I have to burn a CD in windows, load the disk, start the burner interface, click a button to start a different burner interface, search for the files, click burn, click burn, did I remember to fixate the damn thing? no? Ahhhhhh!!! I love going back to my Fedora distro, inserting the blank CD/DVD, d n d'ing the files into the Gnomeburner window, and telling it to write to disk. Files get written, thing ejects, and I'm off and running.

There is another point I read in between the lines of your article: you say RTFM, at least a little. I agree. Where on earth is it written that everything we do must be as easy as possible? How dumb have we become that we cannot type df -k (disk free, in kilobytes), look at the number 75% and realize that we've taken up, three-quarters of our disk space?

In my experience, you can dumb down things to a certain extent. Pass that threshhold, and one of two things happen: 1) the process becomes so basic that in order to do anything interesting it needs to become convoluted, and thus hard again. 2) The operator of your stupid interface has achieved Zen with the stupid interface, and thus has become so unable to think critically that the act of finding the Start button becomes a challenge.

And one more thing: what's easy about fighting viruses coming from anonymous sources every day? Oh, got a virus, got adware, malware, spyware, key-stroke-logging-ware? Sorry, gotta reload. Or at least might as well. Shit. If I wanted to chase viruses all day long I'd join the WHO.

I've read arguments on both sides and I think SlaytanicLemmy is absolutely correct. Neither side is really wrong here. However, I would not say that Linux is ready as a desktop because of some problems that still exist. The biggest problem is the fact that Linux is an online OS. Someone who is on dial-up or not online at all, although not with the times, will not even attempt to try linux. I realized this fact when I first started using linux about 2 years ago. Most of the good things that go with open source will not benefit these users. How can one apt-get new programs if they can't connect to the internet. True, you can use the cd for the distro, but this presents new problems. Just how many people would be willing to go through all this trouble when they could buy their programs from a store?

Windows and Macintosh charge for convenience. It is infinitely more convenient to buy software that installs easily and have hardware installed for you. Why should one worry about if they have a winmodem when they could simply use windows and have it install flawlessly? Furthermore, if I buy a piece of new hardware, I don't want to think about whether it will work for my distro or not.

The funny thing is, since I've switched to linux, changed to broadband and learned how to use it for the most part, I think it will be very hard to switch back to Windows. Why pay for convenience when there's better stuff out there for free? Soon people will discover Linux desktop distros and use them instead of Windows, but I don't think that time has come just yet...

ronald: My point is, not many people are going to be upgrading their soundcard in Linux. Upgrading hardware is still something that is still relatively geekish, although with USB and Firewire it is becoming simpler (note that most important USB devices work on Linux with none to minimal configuration, and in most cases autoconfig). Joe PC is not going to switch video cards, or arrange a dual-headed system. He is most likely going to use the machine, the way it came, and if upgrades are necessary, pay someone else to do it. So the solution is to train our current tech support people in fixing Linux problems, and provide a support base.

A gui is a gui is a gui.Windows, MacOS and whichever flavor of Linux DE you want all have their ups and downs.

The point is, anyone who can point and click can use a gui and be productive on their computer.

My 5yo daughter is just as much at home on her linux box as she is on the wife's Win XP box. She has taught me that what ever the technical differences "under the hood" Linux is just as functional a desktop as windows is.

Just as with windows, it is a matter of getting the right application for the job you want to do.

I can only agree. Linux IS ready for the desktop, Linux has several distros with REALLY good package management, Linux IS user friendly. You do have to acquire some knowledge first to use it, but then what OS doesn't require that?

However, I didn't read Mr. AkaImBatman's article the same way you did. I have to admit at the beginning, after the first part, I went into the same defensive mood you seem to have entered. I considered writing a rant as well. Then I forced myself to read the next three parts. He does have points, or maybe not points but "food for thought". Rather than thinking of Mr. A's article as a complaint on Linux's lack-of-readiness for the desktop I think of it as a collection of "What if Y was changed this way? What would the result be? What could we do then?".

We should definitely not start fixing things that aren't broken as long as we have truly broken things around. But hey, Linux IS ready for the desktop already. Some applications may be lacking functionality, or missing entirely, but most is available. Why not start looking at improving things even more then? Why not make Linux even more userfriendly? Why not play the "What if I change Y?" game?

Linux in the state it is in now will never be a widespread desktop os.

The reason for that is that the average john doe doesnt want to spend 50 hours installing / learning linux only to find out that GTA:SA wont work on it. Its just that simple.

You talk about how easy ermerge is, well emerge is a feature of Gentoo, its one of the hardest linux distro's to install, for the average windows user to be able to benefit from portage they'll have to get Gentoo working first wich will be next to impossible for most average windows users.

I still say the reason people (including myself) do not use Linux is the plain and simple fact that (like you said above) people get frustrated about drivers. I also do not agree at all with the reading first aspect and learning about X and such - what is the point? I am John Q. Public - I know I can click a switch and have my computer come on, and then click on some things on the desktop to get to the internet, etc. I do not know how or what the windows GUI is, or how it is displaying items to me through the AGP/PCI/PCI-E port - hell I dont even know what those things are :)

Until Linux can be installed with basically no user interaction, it will not be accepted.

Until Linux can be made for my 70 year old father-in-law to pick up on real easy ( he did windows ), it will not be accepted.

I have used computers from back in the TRS80 days, vic-20, etc, and I still think Linux is to difficult!! I do not want different kernels available - I want ONE - no ifs, ands, or buts. There is no reason to have to split users on the desktop between graphical interfaces, as this confuses more.

Oh well - I know TONS of people who use Linux, and even more that use Windows. Linux people are not helpful. There is no easy way to learn, so no massive run for the desktop

Mike

OH - I think Linux is a great idea, dont get me wrong, but it is just to hard - bitch, fuss, compain all you want, it IS TO HARD TO LEARN!!!!

Zealots like this is exactly why Linux will never penetrate the desktop in any meaningful way. You can't see the OS from your user's perspective.

Installing packages IS difficult to learn, there IS no manual that speaks in every day language. i've used PCs for 20 years and I can't figure out how to install a damned DVD player on my Linux box. It sits in the corner of my room untill I feel like flagellating my brain over it for a few days, then I give up (as opposed to destroying it with a chainsaw) for a few months before I try it again.

Win users for over a decade now have been running Install.exe or Setup.exe and it just works. Most of the users out there are used to it, know how to use it, live it, love it. Linux programmers need to emulate it or STFU about worldwide adoption because it will never EVER E-V-E-R happen.

Yeah, Linux is "technically" superior. But if people want a superior product, they're not gonna use it. they'll use Mac OS-X. Why? It's so damn easy to use that they dont have to read a manual.

When you are reaching out to potential users, you can't expect them to leave their current system just because the other system may be better. Windows may seem scum to you but when people have it at home and work, they will expect any other system to behave the same way. This is where you bring in a two-pronged strategy. For those already hooked on Windows, give them a Windows-style Linux distro; those who are new to computers ought to get the Linux-style Linux distro for their first computer. The short-term goal is to convince Windows users to move to Linux and the long-term goal is to get young and new users to start on Linux itself.

For Windows users, a good approach would be to have a graphical system that reduces the shell to a "not necessary" status by using smart applications. Most people I know need very few things from their computers: web surfing, email, word processing, pictures and movies, instant messaging. They don't want to deal with hardware and software problems, upgrades, updates, and other such stuff. Believe me, most of the users are this way. If you want to be a useful part of the computing world, make sure that you make what your users want, not what you like and force users to like as well.

I have been using Ubuntu for a week now on a spare computer. I love the apt-get command to install applications. However, when I need to install an application from the source code, I have to deal with dependencies and such. Why do I need to install from source code? Because either a package is not available or the package is old and I need the latest version and features of the application. We need something of a combination of Linux-style package managers and Windows-style individual applications.

I have casually used Mac OS X as well and I liked what I saw. If I am not wrong, to uninstall an application in it, all you have to do is uninstall a single file. Package managers are similar but not quite there because of the version issues. Then there are so many package managers that for a developer it is difficult to determine if she wants to provide just the source code or a specific package file as well. Having a middle layer of package developers seems redundant to me. It should be the duty of the actual developer of an application to maintain bug fixes and upgrades so that anyone who wants to use their application gets to use a standard one. In Ubuntu I get a slightly different application than in Fedora because the packages for them are made by different people from different viewpoints.

We need to define standards and then stick to them. Although the true Linux spirit is that it moves in different directions all at once, a desktop user needs consistency so that she is using Linux instead of Debian or Fedora.

Very good job with your rant. I am a long time Windows, Linux and FreeBSD user, and I ditched Windows for OS X about 3 years ago. Linux *is* ready for the big jump, what it lacks now is marketing. We need to get some of the Mozilla advocacy folks to help the Linux community to deliver the message to the uninformed masses.

There is no point in making the pitch to the Linux aware geeks because they already know it, but we need to educate the regular Joes out there that Linux has progressed even faster than OS X over the last 5 years.

I have one employee that works off OS X 10.4 at the office and Gentoo at home. He is perfectly happy with both, but he is not making any plans to but a Mac for home. Why? Because he is perfectly happy with Gentoo. He even decided to teach himself EMACS so he could use the same editor in OS X than in Gentoo instead of buying a Mac for home so he could use BBEdit Pro (this to me is pretty much sacrilege, but what the hell, he is a cool guy).

I must say that without some of the information you have, would my computer be filled with spyware. I'm always looking for more information about download spyware and I have bookmarked your blog among the must visit resources!

Nice blog. Have you seen your google rating? BlogFlux It's Free and you can add a Little Script to your site that will tell everyone your ranking. I think yours was a 3. I guess you'll have to check it out.

Tip Of The DayClick Fraud and How to Deter It

Pay per click (PPC) advertising continues to gain popularity in the online marketing world as an effective and inexpensive way to drive targeted visitors to web sites. Research firm eMarketer reported that between 2002 and 2003 the paid search listing market grew 175 percent.

Major trusted search properties such as Google, Overture, FindWhat, Search123 and Kanoodle, all offer PPC campaigns in which you pay only when someone clicks through your banner ad or link. But PPC also has an enemy--click fraud--and understanding what it is and what to do about it should also be a key part of your PPC campaign.

What is Click Fraud?Click fraud is when someone or something generates illegitimate hits on your banner or text advertisement causing you to pay for worthless clicks. AS PPC campaigns have grown in popularity and keyword prices and bidding have become more competetive, click fraud is on the rise.

Online marketers are becoming increasingly worried about the prospect of click fraud. According to CNET News, some marketing executives estimate that "up to 20 percent of fees in certain advertising categories continue to be based on nonexistent consumers in today's search industry."

This estimate is certainly unsettling for advertisers who, recently, have been paying hefty amounts bidding on desirable search terms. Financial analysts report that in the year 2004 advertisers are paying an average of 45 cents per click. Compare this to 40 cents in 2003 and 30 cents in 2002 the bidding wars continue to rise.

Who's Doing it and Why?Click fraud perpetrators are most often motivated by trying to increase revenues from affiliate networks or attempting to damage competitors' revenues by forcing them to pay for worthless clicks. The Google Adsense program, in which affiliates receive payment for clicks whether they are real or not, has caused great concern for Google and has intensified its focus on click fraud.

Those engaged in click fraud use a variety of techniques to generate false clicks. Low cost international workers from all over the world are hired to locate and click on ads. The Times of India provided investigative reporting on payment for manual click fraud happening in India. Unethical companies may pay their own employees to click on competitor ads. Last but not least, click fraud can be generated by online robots programmed to click on advertiser or affiliate ads. Some companies go to great lengths creating intricate software that allows for this to happen.

How Can You Deter It?Many advertisers know about the possibility of click fraud but generally haven't done much in the past to prevent it. Some feel that if they complain to any of the search conglomerates, it could ruin their free listings. Others feel like the problem is beyond them.

"It is a bigger problem, but folks just don't want to take the time to track it down because it's a complex problem," stated John Squire, of web analytics firm Coremetrics, to CNET. "Given that some of the largest marketers manage up to 1 million keywords in a campaign the data can be difficult to crunch."

Companies who do understand and report click fraud to search engine properties have had success receiving refunds for fraudulent clicks. For those advertisers who want to address the possibility of click fraud in PPC campaigns, good option do exists. At the most basic level, advertisers can use general auditing many have been known to compile lists of sites that generate high numbers of clicks but not sales. This will indeed put up a red flag.

On the other hand, because click fraud is advancing at such frequency, click fraud detection companies and software have been popping up all over the country. Let's take a look at some of the options:

- WhosClickingWho.com - This fraud detector tracks all PPC search engines, detects multiple IP's, and even pops up a "ClickMinder" after a potential abuser clicks repeatedly over five times.- ClickDetective - ClickDetective allows you to track return visitors to your site and alerts you if there is evidence that your site may be under attack. Its reports show you every click in real time rather than a summary hours later.- BogusClick - BogusClick can help advertisers determine competitor IP addresses, originating PPC search engines and/or partner sites involved, as well as keywords used.- Clicklab - Clicklab employs a score-based click fraud detection system that applies a series of tests to each visitor session and assigns scores. Calculations are made to indicate bad/good sessions to show an advertiser the quality of traffic.

Click fraud is a big problem in search engine marketing that's only going to get bigger in the future. It is wise for any online advertiser to implement some auditing system. Why continue to waste precious campaign money?!

"I just came across your blog about ppc advertising and wanted to let you know that I am impressed with the information here. I also have a website with an added resource that pertains to ppc advertising so I know that your blog is fantastic. Continue with the great resource that you are providing to everyone on the Net!"

GET PAID TO DRIVE YOUR OWN CAR.... BETTER YET GET A FREE CAR -- GET PAID UP TO £1200 A MONTHThis is no scam. This is a genuine offer for you to earn some good cash for doing nothing but drive a car.Get Paid To Drive in UK Now

The BIGGEST advertising coup has been taking the United States of America by storm and now it's available in the United Kingdom! Companies will pay you a monthly fee to display ads on your car!

We offer an introduction to the UK companies that are operating in a fantastic new media, Car Wrapping. You will have seen the promo cars driving around in your area and possibly thought the driver worked for the company.

People all over the World are being paid to drive their cars and now if you live in the UK you can also be paid. By simply driving their car the way they ordinarily would, they are also making up to £1200 per month!

If you are willing to drive your car with a company advertisement on it to your job, the shops, school runs etc., there are companies in the UK looking to pay you to do this - GUARANTEED. This is an ideal way for anyone to earn some additional income!Companies want to give you money for you to DRIVE your own car. They just add advertisements on your car. That's it!

WHAT'S THE CATCH? There isn't! You can drive as you normally do and get paid for itWho Qualifies...

You must be 18 years of age or older, possess a valid drivers license and fill out the required application for each programme you wish to join. You must be a citizen or permanent resident of one of the The United Kingdom.Get Paid To Drive in UK Now

Your driving record, driving habit, location etc will be taken into consideration by the advertiser during the selection process. Most companies require a minimum monthly driving mileage and a clean driving record (at least no driving offences within the past 12 months). PaidtoDrive.co.uk does not pay you to advertise and cannot guarantee your acceptance into any programmed you sign up for. We can, however, guarantee the legitimacy of these programs and the application process.Get Paid To Drive in UK Now

In the event you have been convicted of a driving offence, driving under the influence of drugs/alcohol, or had more than two serious motor accidents in the last two years, we cannot guarantee that your application will be accepted and strongly urge you not to continue any further.

Please visit our frequently asked questions section if you have further questions. Alternatively you can email me at sales@paidtodrive.co.uk Yours Faithfully,www.PaidtoDrive.co.uk Team

This is one of the many jokes i found amongst the many joke categorys:A man walks into his favorite bar and saw a bum panhandeling. The bum asked if the man could spare a dollar. The man replied "If I give you money are you going to use it to buy liquor?" The bum said he would not, so the man asked "If I give you money are you going to use it for gambling?" Again the bum said he would not, so the man asked "Would you come home with me so I can show my wife what happenes to someone who doesnt gamble or drink?"

I just came across your blog about spyware remover tool and wanted to drop you a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here. I also have a web site about spyware remover tool so I know what I'm talking about when I say your site is top-notch! Keep up the great work, you are providing a great resource on the Internet here! If you get a chance, please stop by spyware remover tool

Before computers you had to worry about your office burning down, or some other man-made or natural disaster that might have effected your paper files. Now with just about everything stored on computers, the fear is no different and the possibilities of catastrophic data loss occuring are actually greater.Link to my site: data recovery service software

I just came across your blog and wanted todrop you, Blogger, a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here.If you have a moment, please visit my site: usb dvd burnerIt covers usb dvd burner related contents.I send you warm regards and wish you continued success.

Most spyware and adware is installed unknowingly by the users themselves, i.e., people like you and me. To eliminate it, please visit kill adware. It's usually delivered as a �payload� attached to something useful or attractive such as a screensaver, email smileys, a web accelerator and even fake anti-spyware programs! My 17 Lesson e-course at http://www.spyware-search-and-destroy.com covers everything related to kill adware and will teach you how to eliminate spyware for free!

Hi ##name##. There are many different ways to earn money onlineinternet advertising. I continue to look for different ways to promote my sites and business without going broke. let me know what you all are seeing out there.internet advertising

Hi. I came across your post and found it very interesting. I was wondering whether you can help me in finding more information on "auto ebook delivery". I came across auto ebook delivery. What do you think?

I just came across your blog and wanted todrop you, Blogger, a note telling you how impressed I was with the information you have posted here.If you have a moment, please visit my site: games centerIt covers games center related contents.I send you warm regards and wish you continued success.

Dear friends, here is a really cool site that gives you a lot of FREE information that you can really use. Get FREE Daily and Weekly Foreign Exchange Outlook, Rates, Trends and Currency Shifts. Click here: FOREX

Hello my dear internet friends! I have some very exiting news. A lot of you know me pretty well now and have helped me a lot. I sincerely appreciate you and I want to do the same for you. Please take a moment to check out this excellent opportunity. I am so very proud to be a part of this business, I just don't have the space I need here to fully express my gratitude and I know you will feel the same way I do. You can even try it out at no charge. Take some time to explore and learn what could be one of the most significant aspects in your life. You will not be wasting your time and I will be honored for you to be my guest. You will love this... Please give me a chance to prove it to you. Click here: get making money online started It elegantly covers get making money online started related ideas and FREE information. Sincerely, Scott.

Hey Guys if you have been dumped by adsense or given the run around by Yahoo then you need to look at this, Fair Ads Network are only taken 10,000 members then they are closing the doors, I suggest that you take a look Now before its too late : http://fairadsnetwork.com/034704959097

Regarding your blog about fireplace tool, there are some great deals on offer now at http://www.bargainplace.co.uk. You will get fireplace tool plus fireplace tool. Make sure you bookmark http://www.bargainplace.co.uk now.

JerSooz says ... Saw Your into make money online selling thought would say love Your Stuff we're at make money online selling thought maybe could help each other ... we get great offers & love to share with others make money online selling so dropping a big FYI can maybe help ... Hoping to make LifeTime Friends and JV Partners Jer&Sooz

The web has evolved into a complex "organism" which, to some, appears to have a life of its own. As the Internet has evolved, so too have online marketers and publishers. The dot-com balloon is said to have burst but savvy publishers have grabbed the coat tails of the Google search monster and employ Google AdSense on content-rich websites. Google AdSense, a pioneer for providing content-sensitive advertisements, has been a boon to webmasters looking for alternatives to amortize their web trafffic. The Evolution of Google AdSense

Linux is not ready for the desktop. Package managers are part of the problem, but only part. Linux has a beautiful back-end, but the interface is rough around the edges ... and KDE's pretty buttons don't really help. I used linux for about 4 years, then switched to FreeBSD, which is only marginally better ... I currently prefer MacOSX, which may be messier on the back end, but at least they've paid attention to the user interface. Get your mortgage leads here!

Disaster is likely to wreak havoc in the life of an individual as soon as he becomes victim to erectile dysfunction and the most significant dreadful consequence of erectile dysfunction is that the afflicted man becomes incapable of facilitating erections required for sexual intercourse. The sexual vacuum resulted from erectile dysfunction prompts the sufferer to opt for anti-impotency pills, most especially the viagra medication that was approved by FDA (Food and Drugs Administration) as a clinically effective drug to cure erectile dysfunction in men. Viagra is meant to be administered by patients only after availing of viagra prescription from the doctor. The prescription for Viagra provided by the doctor spells out that the patient suffering from erectile dysfunction seriously need Viagra to treat his disorder and further authorizes the patient to avail of Viagra from the pharmacist.

Although geeky, I have wasted too much of my life on both Windows and Linux.

It took me just a weekend to get to grips with OS/X. Easy.

File systems, just wehn people understand them, we come up with tagging!

I remember trying to get my head around installing TCP/IP and ISP connection scripts on windows. I also remember the early days of networking! So things have come along way, the kids of today are spoilt!

There is nothing wrong with the command line. I'd rather launch an app, by typing it. The google style of just a search box would be good enough. Using suggestions as prompts. Perhaps Icons for my frequently used programs. I wouldn't even mind the OS just noticing and adding them for me.

One major obstacle in Linux for me is configuring the display! I've had endless issues. Compare that with plugging in an external display in OS/X, which is easy.

Package management is a blessing, sometimes a curse. I miss it in when it's not there (badly.) A static download/installable sounds good to me.

I was just looking at KDE and Gnome's roadmap, and it wasn't inspiring. It looks like they are implementing parts of windows from 10 years ago.

Linux misses out on a few big commerical apps. But it's no surprise who'd want to develop commerical software for a moving target? Luckily the open source repositories are great.

Linux needs to be both no frills and easy. All those rough edges need ironing out.

If install Linux on my Mum's computer, want her to just get on with it.

I also want Linux to be revelutionary, lots of aha, that's clever moments. Like 'Tab completion' in the shell. things that make it really quick to use.

I battled last weekend, reinstalling windows XP for someone. I then installed the most recent Ubuntu. It has to be said, Ubuntu was the winner, by a mile.

I had a 12" Mac Powerbook, and as hibernate / suspend worked so well, I never rebooted it, it was great, and it just worked. I miss it.

Whenever we evaluate the concept of the word enjoy, not only in relations to an enchanting marriage by using a different, however like a emotion that could be engendered if you have miltchmonkey an even better marriage with yourself far too ( space ) or even just as being a a sense larger oneness spouse and children or simply humanity , it gets to be substantially more really clear that each one anyone needs in your daily course will be like.

Hi, I do believe this is a great website. I stumbledupon it ;) I will come back yet again since I book-marked it. Money and freedom is the best way to change, may you be rich and continue to help others.

It is important for increasing the penis size increased by up african american skin lightening to 90%. Till fairly recently, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, and HIV/AIDS. Irritation may result african american skin lightening from the procedure after the foreskin is removed, it is impossible that your penis has enlarged. For peak sexual wellness.Versatility of the fruitThese are known to have genital herpes.

Following the climax comes a recovery period of several minutes up to several hours put in at the health club.

Ηi! I know this is sοrt of off-topic howeνer I nееded to ask. Does running a well-establishеԁ wеbsite like yours require a lot оf worκ?

I am complеtеly new to writіng a blog howeνer I do wгite in my journal ԁailу. ӏ'd like to start a blog so I can easily share my own experience and thoughts online. Please let me know if you have any recommendations or tips for new aspiring blog owners. Appreciate it!

Kenan Onel cautions," Larger studies in different populations and with longer follow up is important to first consult with your professional health care provider. These hot flashes are the result of an increase amount in estrogen. What the heck is an apple shaped gal, you may have when it comes to how to male enhancement hypnosis milk production. Over time families have changed from classic extended to modified extended families evident. Since our thoughts male enhancement hypnosis dictate our emotions, and not do it!

Defecate. Preferably after eating senna, ex lax, prunes, cabbage, pickled eggs, and Vietnamese chili garlic sauce. To better enhance the pleasure of this whole process, defecation should be performed in the Return of the Jedi wastebasket for added pleasure. Wipe ass with witch hazel, which soothes horrific burns. (Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda certifies that his lips, raw like beaten flank steak from nearly continuous analingus with dogs, are greatly soothed by witch hazel which makes it perfect for the anus after diarrhea.) Prime anus with anal ease. (Now Cherry Flavored for those butthole lick-o-phillic amongst you - very popular with 99% of the Slashdotting public!) Slather richly a considerable amount of Vaseline and/or other anal lubricants into your rectum at least until the bend and also take your Yoda Doll , Yoda Shampoo bottle or Yoda soap-on-a-rope and liberally apply the lubricants to the Yoda Doll/Yoda Shampoo/Yoda Soap-on-a-rope. You may need your gay squire/lover to help with this since your fat corpulent ass cannot do a self-reach-around. Put a nigger do-rag on Yoda's head so the ears don't stick out like daggers! Make sure to have a mechanism by which to fish Yoda out of your rectum, the soap on the rope is especially useful because the retrieval mechanism is built in. Pucker and relax your balloon knot. Doing Kegel exercises several times actuating the sphincter muscle and relaxing it will help prepare your ass for what is to come. Slowly rest yourself onto your Yoda figurine. Be careful, he's probably bigger than the dicks normally being rammed up your ass! Gyrate gleefully in your computer chair while your fat sexless geek nerd loser fat shit self enjoys the prostate massage you'll be getting. Think about snoodling with the Sarlaac pit. Read Slashdot. Masturbate to anime. Email one of the Slashdot editors hoping they will honor you with a reply. Join several more dating services - this time, you don't select the (desired - speaks English) and (desired - literate). You figure you might get a chance then. Order some fucking crap from Think Geek. Suck and gag on a Dr. Who sonic screwdriver like it was the Doctor's dick in your mouth. Get Linux to boot on a Black and Decker Toaster Oven. Wish you could afford a new computer. Argue that cheap-ass discount bin hardware works 'just as well' as the quality and premium hardware because you can't afford the real stuff. Make claims about how Linux rules. Compile a kernel on your 486SX. Claim to hate Windows but use it for World of Warcraft. Admire Ghyslain's courage in making that wonderful Star Wars movie. Officially convert to the Jedi religion. Talk about how cool Mega Tokyo is. Try and make sure you do your regular 50 story submissions to Slashdot, all of which get rejected because people who aren't fatter than CowboyNeal can't submit. Fondle shrimpy penis while making a Yoda voice and saying, use the force, padawan, feeel the foooorce, hurgm. Yes. Yes. When 900 years you reach, a dick half as big you will not have.

All in a days work with a Yoda figurine rammed up your ass.

I HAVE A GREASED UP YODA DOLL SHOVED UP MY ASS!

GO LINUX!!

Tux is the result after trimming Yoda's ears off so that Lunix people don't rip themselves a new Asshole

Synopsis: --Major Tom goes to the bathroom and shoves a Yoda doll up his ass, and then gimps back to his desk to post AC Trolls on Slashdot. -Yoda Doll to Major Tom. - Yoda Doll to Major Tom. - Take your ex-lax bars and put my do-rag on. - Yoda Doll to Major Tom. - Commencing countdown, rope is on. - Begin insertion and may Goatse's love be with you. -- This is Yoda Doll to Major Tom, - You've rectally been flayed! - And the papers want to know whose shirts you wear. - Now it's time to leave the crapper if you dare. -- This is Major Tom to Yoda Doll, - I'm stepping through the door. - And I'm farting in a most peculiar way! - And my ass looks very different today. - For here... - Am I shitting in the tincan? - Far...too busy posting trolls. -- Slashdot censors you... and there's nothing I can do. -- Uploading one hundred thousand files, - I'm feeling very ill. - I don't think my feces know which way to go. - I can't tell my intestines from spaghetti- - code. Yoda Doll to Major Tom, your prostate's dead, there's something wrong, - Can you hear me, Major Tom? - Can you hear me, Major Tom? - Can you hear me, Major Tom? Can you hear... Am I shitting in the tincan? - My ass like a baboon's - Slashdot censors you - and there's nothing I can do.

The Yoda Pledge

I pledge Allegiance to the Dollof the Greased Up States of Yodaricaand to the Republic for which it shoves,one nation under Yoda, rectal intrusion,with anal lube and ass grease for all.

hello.mpg lyrics.I'm doin' this tonight ,You're probably gonna start a fight .I know this can't be right .Hey baby come on,I loved you endlessly ,When you weren't there for me.So now it's time to leave and make it alone .I know that I can't take no moreIt ain't no lieI wanna see you out that doorBaby , bye, bye, bye...

A picture of your ass after YODA.

A POAST from Rob Malda's "Chips & Dips" Website (July 1997), which is the direct precursor to Slashdot, it was located at: http://www.cs.hope.edu/~malda/cnd/

Wed, July 23 Prequel Yoda Pictures! From the Aren't-you-a-bit-early? Dept Once again Harry Knowles catches the scoop on time with some great pictures of the clay sculpture that will be digitized and used for the CGI Yoda in the Prequels. Check it out at Aint-it-cool-News.

Looks like Malda's been chomping at the bit to get a greased up Yoda in his ass for some time now.

Yoda Doll I'd like to know, If you get in my back door, Which will only make me want you more, Get your greased ass on the floor, Ooh oh Yoda Doll, Your my Yoda Doll, Ooh oh Yoda Doll, Greased up Yoda Doll

If you can feel what I am feeling, Then the grease is just believing, You're my, you're my Yoda Doll, Ooh oh Yoda Doll

You fit right in my sphincter, I'm so proud to have you in me, I persist to enjoy all your grease, I persist to enjoy all your grease, I persist to enjoy all your grease, I persist to enjoy all your grease, I persist to enjoy all your grease

Yoda Doll where we go wrong, The love I felt was all gone, Why did I pull you out so soon, Look at all the shit in this room

If you can feel what I am feeling, Then the grease is just believing, You're my, you're my Yoda Doll, Ooh oh Yoda Doll, You'll always be my Yoda Doll, Greased up Yoda Doll

On a dark butt-soaked highwayJedi jizz in my hairWarm smell of anal greaseRising up through the airUp ahead in the distanceI saw ass pummeling sightMy head grew heavy, and my anus grew taughtI had to stoop for the plightThere he sat in my anusSmelled jedi ass juice smellAnd I was thinking to myselfThis could be Heaven or this could be HellUp my ass went candleAnd he showed me the wayThere were voices coming out my assI thought I heard them say

Welcome to the Hotel Greased Up Yoda DollSuch a lovely placeSuch a lovely place (background)Such a lovely facePlenty of room in my anus at the Hotel Greased Up Yoda DollAny time of yearAny time of year (background)You can find him thereYou can find him there

His mind is Tiffany twistedhe's makes my intestines bendshe's got a lot of pretty faggot boysThat he calls friendsHow they twist in my anusSweet glory holeSome grease their anus to rememberSome grease their anus to forgetSo I called up the CaptainPlease bring me my lubeHe saidWe haven't had that spirit here since 1972And still those voices are calling far up my assWake you up in the middle of the nightHear that jedi say

Welcome to the Hotel Greased Up Yoda DollSuch a lovely PlaceSuch a lovely Place (background)Such a lovely faceThey're livin' it up at the Hotel Greased Up Yoda DollWhat a nice surpriseWhat a nice surprise (background)Bring your alibiesMirrors on the ceilingPink intestines on iceAnd he saidWe are all just prisoners hereYodas stuffed up our assAnd in the master's chambersThey gathered for the feastPlunge it up there with their steely knivesBut they just can't kill the beastLast thing I rememberI'm in ecstasyGreased up yoda doll shoved right up my assRelax your anus said the nightmanWe are programmed for anal receiveYou can plunge that yoda doll up your anusBut you can never leave